We all know about the allegations of ageism at the BBC, what with Arlene-gate (yeah, I made that up...), Moira Stuart and however many other older women have complained
And broadly I agree - it's notable that there is an absence of older women (over 50), particularly compared to the old geezers still hanging around the Beeb (as I found out in a ridiculously lengthy post before)
But this has always been an allegation - the women either retired or were dropped, like any other worker - there was no 'you're too old, bye!!' - it's a perception that it's deliberate, there's no actual proof
Of course, the BBC has to be receptive to public opinion, and clearly it's justified, especially in current affairs programmes (dramas and soaps are full of old women) - but is not deliberately looking for newsreaders based on age and sex against the law?
Under the Equalities bill it wouldn't be, but right now to select based on any kind of physical discrimination is illegal - I know that the media deliberately pick people for certain 'qualities' - but is this not blatant enough to actually be a breach of discrimination law? Seems to me the BBC are leaving themselves open to prosecution, if they, for example, ignore young people or men - they could be cutting off their nose to spite their face here
Not that anyone would normally care - except that this is the BBC and I would bet the Mail will jump on it - they love a good bit of hypocrisy, I'd put money on it and I'll be looking out for it
I do of course, have to ask - does this mean the Mail now support Hattie's 'equality' bill?